During the feudal period the person in general was not attachable for debt. imprisonment being inconsistent with the duties of warlike service, to which every man was bound: and it was for the encouragement of coinnacree and in considera tion of the merchant having to deal \vitt] stran gers and foreigners that it was first introduced by the mercantile communities of Europe. By the Statute of Merchants it was enacted by the English Parliament. in 12S2, that in lending money a merchant might bring the borrower be fore the Lord Mayor of London. or the chief warden of another good town, and cause him to acknowledge his debt and day of payment. A recognizance (q.v.) was then enrolled, and an obligation written by the clerk and sealed with the King's seal and the debtor's. Failing pay ment, the creditor was entitled to produce this obligation, and to demand a warrant to seize the person of his debtor and to commit him to the Tower. This barbarous practice of punishing misfortune as a crime flourished in England for Fix hundred years. until the humanitarian senti ment of our own time, stirred into action by the efforts of Samuel Romilly and other reformers, forced the abandonment of the practice. An impression of the extent of the hardship which it involved may be gained from the statistics. Par liamentary returns show that in the eighteen months subsequent to the commercial panic of 1825, 10)•000 writs for debt were issued from the English courts. In the year ending Janu ary 5. 1830. there were 7114 debtors sent to prison in London, and on that day 1545 of these were still in confinement. In general it may be said that. up to the time of the reform legisla
tion referred to, the prisons of England were crowded with debtors. The first statute afford ing partial relief to these unfortunates was passed in 1S38, but it was not until 186S that the system was abolished (Statutes 32 and 33 Viet., c. 62).
The practice of imprisonment for debt has also prevailed, though to a much more limited ex tent, in the United States. It was abolished in New York in )831, and shortly after that date by the other States in which it had been per mitted. In many of the States it has never been recognized. Both in England and the Unit ed States, however, a limited right of coercing a dishonest debtor by arrest in civil process is permitted by statute. It is generally allowed in actions for injury to the person or character, or for injury to or the wrongful taking of property, embezzlement by public officers or persons acting in a private fiduciary capacity as trustees; for misconduct in office, or in any professional em ployment: in actions to recover possession of personal property, where it is concealed or kept out of the reach of the sheriff: and where the defendant has been guilty of fraud in contracting the debt or in avoiding payment. Women are generally exempt from arrest in all eases except actions for willful injury to person. character, or property.
As to the manner in which the position of the debtor has been mitigated by the general adoption of the principle of the bankruptcy and insolvency laws, see those titles. See also DEtrr, and the titles there referred to. For the remedies avail able against absconding debtors. see \itscoNnixo.